How is Frankenstein similar to Greek mythology?

Author: Martin Munyao Muinde
Email: ephantusmartin@gmail.com

Abstract

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1818) stands as one of the most enduring works of Gothic literature, weaving together themes of creation, hubris, and divine retribution that echo throughout classical antiquity. This essay explores the profound similarities between Shelley’s masterpiece and Greek mythology, examining how the novel draws upon ancient mythological frameworks to explore timeless questions about human nature, scientific ambition, and moral responsibility. Through comparative analysis of mythological parallels, thematic connections, and structural similarities, this study demonstrates that Frankenstein functions as a modern mythological narrative that translates classical concerns into the context of Romantic-era scientific discovery and philosophical inquiry.

Introduction

The relationship between Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and Greek mythology extends far beyond mere literary influence, representing a fundamental reimagining of classical themes for the modern age. When Shelley penned her revolutionary novel in 1818, she drew upon a rich tapestry of mythological traditions that had shaped Western literature for millennia. The parallels between Victor Frankenstein’s scientific pursuits and the hubris of Greek mythological figures reveal deeper philosophical questions about the nature of creation, the limits of human knowledge, and the consequences of transgressing divine boundaries.

Greek mythology has long served as a repository of archetypal stories that explore fundamental human experiences and moral dilemmas. These ancient narratives provide frameworks for understanding complex relationships between mortals and the divine, the natural and supernatural, and the individual and society. Similarly, Frankenstein operates as a modern mythology, addressing contemporary anxieties about scientific progress, industrialization, and the changing relationship between humanity and nature. The novel’s enduring popularity and cultural impact demonstrate its mythological status in modern consciousness, functioning as a cautionary tale that resonates across generations and cultures.

The Prometheus Parallel: Creation and Consequence

The most explicit connection between Frankenstein and Greek mythology lies in the novel’s subtitle: “The Modern Prometheus.” This deliberate invocation of the Titan Prometheus establishes a direct lineage between Victor Frankenstein and the mythological figure who stole fire from the gods to benefit humanity. Both characters represent the archetypal overreacher who transgresses divine boundaries in pursuit of knowledge and power, ultimately facing severe consequences for their actions. The Promethean myth serves as a foundational framework for understanding Victor’s scientific ambitions and the catastrophic results of his experiments.

Prometheus, in Greek mythology, defied Zeus by stealing fire and giving it to mortals, an act that brought both civilization and suffering to humanity. His punishment—eternal torment chained to a rock while an eagle devours his regenerating liver—represents the price of challenging divine authority. Similarly, Victor Frankenstein steals the “fire” of creation itself, usurping God’s role as the sole creator of life. His discovery of the secret of animation parallels Prometheus’s theft of divine fire, both representing forbidden knowledge that transforms the human condition. The consequences for both figures involve prolonged suffering and isolation, suggesting that certain boundaries should not be crossed regardless of potential benefits to humanity.

The theme of unintended consequences further connects these narratives, as both Prometheus and Victor discover that their gifts to humanity come with unforeseen costs. Prometheus’s fire enabled human progress but also brought the capacity for destruction and warfare. Victor’s creation of artificial life initially appears to be a triumph of scientific achievement, but it ultimately unleashes a force beyond his control that brings death and devastation to those he loves. This parallel emphasizes the mythological theme that progress often comes with a hidden price, and that human ambition can lead to outcomes that exceed the creator’s intentions or ability to control.

Hubris and Divine Punishment

The concept of hubris—excessive pride or arrogance that leads to downfall—forms a central pillar connecting Frankenstein to Greek mythological tradition. Greek mythology is replete with stories of mortals who overestimate their abilities or challenge the gods, only to face divine retribution that serves as both punishment and cosmic correction. Victor Frankenstein embodies this classical pattern of hubris, displaying an arrogant confidence in his scientific abilities and a presumptuous desire to transcend natural limitations. His declaration that he will “penetrate into the recesses of nature” and discover the “causes of generation and life” reflects the same prideful ambition that characterizes mythological figures like Icarus, Bellerophon, and Phaethon.

The structure of Victor’s downfall closely mirrors the pattern of divine punishment found throughout Greek mythology. Like Icarus, who flew too close to the sun despite his father’s warnings, Victor ignores the counsel of his mentor Professor Waldman and the accumulated wisdom of previous generations of natural philosophers. His single-minded pursuit of forbidden knowledge leads him to isolation from family and friends, paralleling the way mythological figures often find themselves cut off from divine favor and human community as a result of their transgressions. The progressive nature of his punishment—beginning with the horror of his creation and escalating through the murders of his brother, friend, and bride—reflects the systematic way in which Greek mythological justice unfolds.

The creature itself functions as an agent of divine retribution, much like the Furies or other supernatural forces of justice in Greek mythology. While Victor creates the being through scientific means, the creature’s subsequent actions serve to punish Victor’s hubris in a manner that seems almost divinely ordained. The creature’s systematic destruction of Victor’s loved ones mirrors the way mythological justice often targets what the transgressor values most, ensuring that the punishment fits the crime. This pattern suggests that Shelley conceived of her narrative within a framework of cosmic justice that echoes classical mythological traditions.

The Creator-Creation Dynamic

The relationship between Victor Frankenstein and his creature parallels numerous mythological dynamics between creators and their creations, particularly the complex relationship between gods and mortals in Greek mythology. Zeus’s creation of Pandora, for example, demonstrates how divine creators often produce beings that subsequently cause problems for their makers and for humanity as a whole. Pandora, like Frankenstein’s creature, begins as an artificial creation designed for a specific purpose but develops beyond her creator’s control, ultimately releasing evils into the world. This parallel suggests that the act of creation inherently involves unpredictable consequences that exceed the creator’s original intentions.

The creature’s demand for a companion echoes mythological themes about the fundamental need for companionship and the dangers of isolation. In Greek mythology, the gods themselves exist within complex social hierarchies and relationships, suggesting that even divine beings require community and connection. The creature’s argument that he deserves a mate because no being should exist in complete isolation reflects mythological understanding about the social nature of existence. Victor’s refusal to create a female creature parallels divine decisions in mythology where gods deny mortal requests that might upset cosmic order, even when those requests seem reasonable or just.

The abandonment of the creature by its creator establishes another important parallel with mythological narratives about divine neglect and its consequences. Many Greek myths explore what happens when gods fail to properly care for their creations or when they abandon their responsibilities toward mortals. The creature’s transformation from an initially benevolent being into a vengeful monster reflects the mythological pattern whereby neglected or mistreated beings turn against their creators. This dynamic appears in stories like that of Medea, who turns against Jason when he betrays her, or Clytemnestra, who murders Agamemnon in response to his sacrifice of their daughter. These parallels suggest that creators bear ongoing responsibility for their creations, and that abandonment or mistreatment inevitably leads to retribution.

Themes of Isolation and Alienation

The motif of isolation and alienation runs throughout both Frankenstein and Greek mythology, reflecting deeper concerns about the human condition and the price of transgression. Victor’s self-imposed isolation during his scientific experiments mirrors the exile experienced by mythological figures who cross divine boundaries or violate social norms. Characters like Oedipus, who discovers his unwitting crimes and blinds himself in horror, or Orestes, who must flee after avenging his father’s murder, demonstrate the pattern of isolation that follows transgression in mythological narratives. Victor’s withdrawal from family and friends, his secretive behavior, and his ultimate pursuit of the creature across desolate landscapes all echo this classical pattern of mythological exile.

The creature’s alienation represents perhaps an even more profound form of isolation, as he exists as a unique being without natural kin or community. His situation parallels that of mythological monsters and hybrid beings who exist on the margins of both divine and mortal worlds. Figures like the Minotaur, born from unnatural union and hidden away in a labyrinth, or the Sphinx, existing as a riddle-posing guardian between worlds, share the creature’s fundamental isolation from normal social structures. The creature’s eloquent expressions of loneliness and his desperate desire for acceptance reflect the tragic dimension of mythological beings who exist outside conventional categories of existence.

Both Victor and the creature experience a form of cosmic loneliness that transcends mere social isolation, suggesting their alienation from the natural order itself. This existential isolation appears frequently in Greek mythology, where characters who transgress divine law often find themselves cut off not only from human community but from harmony with the cosmos itself. The perpetual winter that seems to follow Victor’s pursuit of the creature in the novel’s final chapters symbolically represents this cosmic alienation, creating a landscape that reflects the characters’ internal states of desolation and disconnection from natural rhythms and relationships.

Monsters and Monstrous Births

The creation of monsters through unnatural means represents another significant parallel between Frankenstein and Greek mythological traditions. Greek mythology abounds with stories of monstrous births that result from divine intervention, curse, or unnatural union. The birth of Medusa and her sisters from the union of sea deities, the creation of the Minotaur from Pasiphaë’s unnatural desire, and the generation of various hybrid creatures through divine transformation all provide precedents for understanding the creature’s unnatural origin. These mythological monsters typically embody specific fears or represent divine punishment for moral transgressions, much as the creature embodies contemporary anxieties about scientific overreach and the violation of natural boundaries.

The creature’s physical appearance and superhuman abilities align with characteristics of mythological monsters, who often possess both terrible aspects and remarkable powers. Like the Nemean Lion with its impenetrable hide or the Hydra with its regenerating heads, the creature demonstrates physical capabilities that exceed normal human limitations. His ability to survive in harsh climates, his superhuman strength, and his resistance to conventional weapons all echo the invulnerable or enhanced qualities that characterize mythological monsters. However, unlike purely destructive mythological monsters, the creature possesses intelligence, emotion, and moral reasoning, making him a more complex figure that challenges simple categorizations of good and evil.

The creature’s function as both victim and victimizer reflects the ambiguous moral status of many mythological monsters, who often embody divine justice even as they cause suffering for mortals. Monsters like the Sphinx or the Harpies serve as agents of divine will while simultaneously tormenting humans, creating moral complexity that resists simple resolution. The creature similarly functions as an instrument of justice against Victor’s hubris while also becoming a source of terror and destruction for innocent victims. This moral ambiguity reflects the sophisticated understanding of justice and retribution that characterizes the most enduring mythological narratives.

The Hero’s Journey and Tragic Structure

Frankenstein follows narrative patterns established in Greek mythological traditions, particularly the structure of the tragic hero’s journey and the archetypal quest narrative. Victor’s initial enthusiasm for natural philosophy and his progressive discovery of scientific principles mirror the classical hero’s call to adventure and acquisition of special knowledge or powers. His isolation during the creation process parallels the hero’s separation from ordinary society during the transformative phase of the mythological journey. However, unlike traditional mythological heroes who return to benefit their communities, Victor’s “return” brings only destruction and suffering.

The novel’s tragic structure follows patterns established in Greek dramatic tradition, where the protagonist’s fatal flaw (hamartia) leads inevitably to catastrophic consequences. Victor’s hamartia—his prideful ambition and refusal to accept natural limitations—drives the narrative toward its tragic conclusion in a manner that echoes classical tragedies like Oedipus Rex or Antigone. The ironic reversal of fortune, where Victor’s greatest achievement becomes the source of his ultimate destruction, reflects the dramatic irony that characterizes Greek tragic tradition. The audience recognizes the impending disaster even as the protagonist remains blind to the consequences of his actions.

The circular structure of the narrative, beginning and ending with Walton’s Arctic expedition, creates a framework that echoes the cyclical nature of mythological time and the eternal recurrence of archetypal patterns. Walton’s own scientific ambitions and his encounter with Victor create the possibility that the pattern of hubris and punishment might repeat itself, suggesting that mythological themes transcend individual characters and represent eternal aspects of human nature. This structural parallel with mythological narratives emphasizes the universal and timeless qualities that have made Frankenstein an enduring cultural myth.

Divine Justice and Moral Order

The concept of cosmic justice that operates throughout Frankenstein closely parallels the moral framework of Greek mythology, where divine justice ultimately prevails despite temporary chaos or suffering. In Greek mythological tradition, actions that violate natural order or divine law inevitably produce consequences that restore cosmic balance, even if justice appears delayed or operates through indirect means. The creature’s systematic revenge against Victor follows this pattern of mythological justice, where punishment specifically targets what the transgressor values most and reflects the nature of the original crime.

The novel’s exploration of moral responsibility extends beyond individual culpability to encompass broader questions about the relationship between knowledge and wisdom that permeate mythological literature. Greek myths frequently examine the distinction between cleverness (metis) and wisdom (sophia), often showing how intellectual ability without moral understanding leads to disaster. Victor’s scientific brilliance untempered by ethical consideration parallels mythological figures like Daedalus, whose technical skill creates both marvels and tragedies, or Odysseus, whose cleverness sometimes creates more problems than it solves.

The absence of divine intervention in the traditional sense within Frankenstein paradoxically strengthens rather than weakens the mythological parallels, as the novel demonstrates how moral order operates through natural consequences rather than supernatural intervention. This approach reflects Enlightenment rationalism while maintaining mythological structure, suggesting that cosmic justice operates through psychological and social mechanisms rather than direct divine action. The result is a mythology adapted for a scientific age that maintains classical moral frameworks while explaining their operation through naturalistic rather than supernatural means.

Nature and the Sublime

The role of nature in Frankenstein reflects mythological traditions that understand the natural world as a manifestation of divine power and moral order. Greek mythology frequently portrays nature as responsive to human moral behavior, with natural phenomena serving as expressions of divine pleasure or displeasure. The storm that occurs during the creature’s animation and the harsh Arctic landscape that frames the novel’s conclusion both echo mythological uses of natural imagery to reflect moral and cosmic themes. These natural settings function symbolically in ways that parallel mythological landscapes, where geography often represents psychological or spiritual states.

The sublime natural scenes that provide both comfort and terror to the novel’s characters reflect the dual nature of divine power in Greek mythology, where natural forces can be both creative and destructive. Victor’s alternating responses to natural beauty—sometimes finding solace in Alpine landscapes and other times feeling overwhelmed by nature’s power—mirror the complex relationship between mortals and divine forces in mythological narratives. The creature’s affinity for wild and desolate places echoes the mythological association between monstrous beings and liminal natural spaces that exist outside human civilization.

The novel’s treatment of natural philosophy and scientific investigation reflects mythological themes about the proper relationship between humans and natural forces. Greek mythology often portrays attempts to control or manipulate nature as forms of hubris that inevitably result in divine punishment. Victor’s scientific project represents precisely this type of presumptuous attempt to master natural forces, and the consequences he faces align with mythological patterns of retribution for such overreach. This parallel suggests that Shelley conceived of scientific investigation as subject to the same moral constraints that govern human behavior in mythological traditions.

Conclusion

The similarities between Frankenstein and Greek mythology extend far beyond surface parallels to encompass fundamental structural, thematic, and philosophical connections that demonstrate the novel’s function as a modern mythological narrative. Mary Shelley’s masterpiece translates classical concerns about hubris, divine justice, and moral responsibility into the context of scientific discovery and Romantic-era philosophy, creating a mythology that addresses contemporary anxieties while drawing upon eternal human themes. The Promethean framework that explicitly connects Victor to mythological tradition serves as the foundation for deeper explorations of creation, alienation, and cosmic justice that resonate with archetypal patterns established in ancient Greek narratives.

The enduring power of Frankenstein as a cultural myth demonstrates its success in adapting classical mythological structures to modern concerns. Like the Greek myths that have shaped Western literature for millennia, Shelley’s novel provides a framework for understanding complex moral and philosophical questions that transcend its specific historical context. The creature has become an archetypal figure comparable to mythological monsters and heroes, while Victor Frankenstein represents the eternal pattern of the overreaching mortal who faces divine retribution for transgressing natural boundaries. These characters have achieved mythological status precisely because they embody universal themes that appear throughout human cultural expression.

References

Baldick, C. (1987). In Frankenstein’s Shadow: Myth, Monstrosity, and Nineteenth-Century Writing. Oxford University Press.

Bloom, H. (1987). Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. Chelsea House Publishers.

Butler, M. (1993). “Frankenstein and Radical Science.” Times Literary Supplement, 9-11.

Gilbert, S. M., & Gubar, S. (2000). The Madwoman in the Attic: The Woman Writer and the Nineteenth-Century Literary Imagination. Yale University Press.

Graves, R. (1992). The Greek Myths. Penguin Classics.

Hamilton, E. (1942). Mythology. Little, Brown and Company.

Levine, G. (1979). “The Ambiguous Heritage of Frankenstein.” The Endurance of Frankenstein, 3-30.

Marshall, D. (1995). “Frankenstein, or Rousseau’s Monster: Sympathy and Speculative Eyes.” Eighteenth-Century Life, 19(1), 21-36.

Mellor, A. K. (1988). Mary Shelley: Her Life, Her Fiction, Her Monsters. Methuen.

O’Flinn, P. (1986). “Production and Reproduction: The Case of Frankenstein.” Literature and History, 12(2), 194-213.

Shelley, M. (1818). Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus. Lackington, Hughes, Harding, Mavor & Jones.

Small, C. (1973). Ariel Like a Harpy: Shelley, Mary and Frankenstein. Victor Gollancz Ltd.

Vasbinder, S. (1984). Scientific Attitudes in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. UMI Research Press.

Williams, A. (1997). Art of Darkness: A Poetics of Gothic. University of Chicago Press.

Youngquist, P. (1991). “Frankenstein: The Mother, the Daughter, and the Monster.” Philological Quarterly, 70(3), 339-359.